Facebook Follies of Friends and Families

[Jacob]

[Berkut]

All that said, I think the scenario of "regular dude dresses up as chick just so he can win" is up there with "so now any guy can go into womens' washroom to oogle our daughters just by saying 'I'm really a girl, lol' " as being a constructed scenario (or deliberate trolling action) primarily used to fuel culture war positions.

I think this will definitely happen, and is not at all a constructed scenario.

I think if given the chance, there will always be assholes willing to ruin things for everyone else.

And if there was no rule against men playing in women's sports, it is very much the case that someone will do just that.

If people want to propose new rules to reflect a better understand of gender realities, then it behooves them to also come up with ways of dealing with the completely foreseeable results of those new rules. And I think people can express concern about that in perfectly good faith.

[Josquius]

All that said, I think the scenario of "regular dude dresses up as chick just so he can win" is up there with "so now any guy can go into womens' washroom to oogle our daughters just by saying 'I'm really a girl, lol' " as being a constructed scenario (or deliberate trolling action) primarily used to fuel culture war positions.

I think this will definitely happen, and is not at all a constructed scenario.

I think if given the chance, there will always be assholes willing to ruin things for everyone else.

And if there was no rule against men playing in women's sports, it is very much the case that someone will do just that.

If people want to propose new rules to reflect a better understand of gender realities, then it behooves them to also come up with ways of dealing with the completely foreseeable results of those new rules. And I think people can express concern about that in perfectly good faith.

You're missing the fundamental point that this isn't a case of new rules being introduced to allow trans people to compete. Trans and intersex people being allowed is the default situation.
It's those who are claiming to have concerns about niche scenarios which want to introduce sweeping new rules to change this.

[Admiral Yi]

You're missing the fundamental point that this isn't a case of new rules being introduced to allow trans people to compete. Trans and intersex people being allowed is the default situation.
It's those who are claiming to have concerns about niche scenarios which want to introduce sweeping new rules to change this.

I honestly don't know what you mean by this.

The first headline case of a transgender competing that I'm aware of was Renee Richards suing for the right to play women's tennis.  If she had to sue then by definition the default was birth women only.

Then up until recently transgender teens really wasn't a thing, so schools didn't have any rules about transgender sports.  It became a thing and some schools introduced rules saying transgenders could (must?) compete in their chosen gender.

So please explain what you mean when you say it's the default.

[The Larch]

The first headline case of a transgender competing that I'm aware of was Renee Richards suing for the right to play women's tennis.  If she had to sue then by definition the default was birth women only.

Regulations were changed precisely because of her case:

In 1976, Richards's gender reassignment was outed by local TV anchor Richard Carlson, the father of Tucker Carlson.[16] Subsequently the United States Tennis Association (USTA), the Women's Tennis Association (WTA), and the United States Open Committee (USOC) required all female competitors to verify their sex with a Barr body test of their chromosomes.[4][7][17] Richards applied to play in the US Open in 1976 as a woman, but refused to take the test, and thus was not allowed to compete in the Open, Wimbledon, or the Italian Open in the summer of 1976.[4]

Richards then sued the United States Tennis Association (USTA), which runs the US Open, in New York state court, alleging discrimination by gender in violation of the New York Human Rights Law.[4][7][17] She asserted that participating in the tournament would constitute "an acceptance of her right to be a woman."[7] Some USTA members felt that others would undergo sex change to enter women's tennis.[4][7] Sports Illustrated called Richards an "extraordinary spectacle", and characterized reactions to her as "varying from astonishment to suspicion, sympathy, resentment, and more often than not, utter confusion."[7] The USOC stated "there is competitive advantage for a male who has undergone a sex change surgery as a result of physical training and development as a male."[7][18] Richards finally agreed to take the Barr body test. The test results were ambiguous. She refused to take it again and was barred from play.[7]

On August 16, 1977, Judge Alfred M. Ascione found in Richards's favor. He ruled: "This person is now a female" and that requiring Richards to pass the Barr body test was "grossly unfair, discriminatory and inequitable, and a violation of her rights."[5][19] He further ruled that the USTA intentionally discriminated against Richards, and granted Richards an injunction against the USTA and the USOC, allowing her to play in the US Open.[5][7] Richards lost to Virginia Wade in the first round of the singles competition, but made it to the finals in doubles.[4][7][17]

[Admiral Yi]

Fair enough.  A sex test was introduced which didn't exist before.  But by no stretch does that mean that transgender women were allowed to compete prior to that.

[The Larch]

Fair enough.  A sex test was introduced which didn't exist before.  But by no stretch does that mean that transgender women were allowed to compete prior to that.

It follows that, on the absence of any testing, people who identified as females could enter tennis competitions in the female category with no barrier whatsoever.

[Admiral Yi]

It follows that, on the absence of any testing, people who identified as females could enter tennis competitions in the female category with no barrier whatsoever.

By that same logic it also follows that cis males could enter female competitions with no barrier whatsoever.

[Jacob]

It follows that, on the absence of any testing, people who identified as females could enter tennis competitions in the female category with no barrier whatsoever.

By that same logic it also follows that cis males could enter female competitions with no barrier whatsoever.

Cis males typically don't identify as females, so no.

[Admiral Yi]

Cis males typically don't identify as females, so no.

The USTA had no tests on gender identification.  Remember I'm using Larch's logic. 

[Jacob]

The USTA had no tests on gender identification.  Remember I'm using Larch's logic.

Yes, and Larch's logic is:

If someone is self-identifying as female, they were admitted.

Someone who is cis-male does not identify as female, by definition. If someone with a cis-male physiological characteristics self-identify as female, they are not cis-male but a trans-woman.

So no, cis-males could not enter those competitions.

[Tamas]

The USTA had no tests on gender identification.  Remember I'm using Larch's logic.

Yes, and Larch's logic is:

If someone is self-identifying as female, they were admitted.

Someone who is cis-male does not identify as female, by definition. If someone with a cis-male physiological characteristics self-identify as female, they are not cis-male but a trans-woman.

So no, cis-males could not enter those competitions.

So let's say he just lies,  signs up to the women's competition and say he identifies as female. Does that turn him into a trans-woman?

[DGuller]

Sometimes rules don't exist because they didn't need to exist.  Things change and now some things that didn't need to get spelled out before need to be spelled out now.  That's how rules and laws work and evolve, there is nothing illegitimate about it.  If you had to have rules for every possible eventuality, you'd have an unwieldy set of tomes for a rule book.

[DGuller]

Someone who is cis-male does not identify as female, by definition. If someone with a cis-male physiological characteristics self-identify as female, they are not cis-male but a trans-woman.

So no, cis-males could not enter those competitions.

You are literally defining away an argument without doing anything in the slightest to honestly address it.

[Valmy]

It follows that, on the absence of any testing, people who identified as females could enter tennis competitions in the female category with no barrier whatsoever.

By that same logic it also follows that cis males could enter female competitions with no barrier whatsoever.

Cis males typically don't identify as females, so no.

No they most certainly typically don't. But if you are a poor 3rd world guy and winning that olympic might set you and your family up for life?

Or, you know, just a crazy competitive athlete who can rationalize anything on the way to victory. I mean most cis males don't willingly take drugs that make their testicles shrink either...